Gransnet forums

News & politics

But they don't get involved in politics, not at all....

(58 Posts)
Alegrias1 Fri 28-May-21 10:46:41

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57280315

Earl and Countess of Strathearn meet with Gordon Brown who has just launched a pro-Union initiative.

Alegrias1 Sun 06-Jun-21 18:58:56

That's interesting Baggs, I didn't know that. Maybe the Unionists think they need every vote they can get and the 2 they'd probably get from William and Kate if they move to Scotland might just swing it. wink

Baggs Sun 06-Jun-21 18:51:11

If by 'here' you mean Scotland, Alegrias, I think you'll find they do have a vote* anywhere in the UK like every other UK citizen who bothers to make sure they're on the electoral register.

*Based on my understanding that even the Queen has a vote but traditionally doesn't use it.

Alegrias1 Sun 06-Jun-21 16:16:47

Serious question lemongrove; why do the RF have quite a big interest in this? That might sound naïve but if one of the countries of which they will be head of state wants to change its system of governance, why is it important what they think?

They don't even have a vote here wink

lemongrove Sun 06-Jun-21 16:10:38

The RF do have quite a big interest in all this Aleg though it remains to be seen if William and Kate basing themselves more at Balmoral and being seen around Scotland more will actually boost public support for the Union.

Alegrias1 Sun 06-Jun-21 14:22:51

They met with Sturgeon I expect because she's running the country.

FarNorth Sun 06-Jun-21 14:15:27

Brown is not just a former politician with his own personal views.

"Soon after the Holyrood election Mr Brown announced his Our Scottish Future think tank which will become a “campaigning movement” seeking to appeal to “middle Scotland”, those who are not entrenched in their positions on the union or independence."

PW&K may well have been simply informing themselves by meeting with Brown and Sturgeon.

It doesn't mean that there is no hidden agenda from the UK government.

Callistemon Sun 06-Jun-21 14:12:35

Oh that cake comment did make me laugh Call

I'm glad you found it so funny, it wasn't meant nastily!
🎂

Do we know exactly what was discussed? Gordon and Sarah Brown do a lot for charity now, as do William and Kate.

Baggs Sun 06-Jun-21 13:02:23

Insert "think it" after will

Baggs Sun 06-Jun-21 13:01:35

I therefore don't think William talking to folks in Scotland is manifestly anti-independence. Not technically, when you consider the history of the crown.

People will in any case but my argument remains intact for all that 😉

Baggs Sun 06-Jun-21 12:59:09

Cake and eat it.

Just so in one sense, or possibly more than one. But, as has been pointed out, there was a royal (¿crown?) union before there was a political union in other respects.

Alegrias1 Sun 06-Jun-21 12:28:05

Oh that cake comment did make me laugh Call. I guess all those independent countries where the Queen is HoS have having their cake and eating it too? You know, Canada, NZ, Australia...

We have a new phrase for attitudes like that; "know your place Unionism"

Anyway the politics thing. Pro-RF people on here say all the time that its good to have an RF instead of an elected HoS because they are above politics, they "advise" based on their vast knowledge of the constitution and history. So when we see PW having a private meeting with a pro-independence former PM with no elected post, and then 2 weeks later the news comes out that the Palace are considering getting PW to get more involved with Scotland to save the Union, forgive me, its not me that's being ludicrous.

Callistemon Sun 06-Jun-21 11:40:38

If I've understood correctly, I think a politically independent Scotland that the SNP envisages would still have the Queen as their state figurehead.

Cake and eat it.

Well they clearly do get involved in politics.

Have you never heard if the red boxes Algerias?
I'm astonished.

No, our Head of State and future Heads of State should not be biased and there is nothing to indicate that is so, but to assume that they must not be aware of everything that is going on is ludicrous.

Alegrias1 Sun 06-Jun-21 11:23:17

The "EU" are presumably political UG?

While the pro-RF people keep telling us that the RF don't get involved in politics at all, and that's one of the reasons for sticking with them.

Well they clearly do get involved in politics.

Urmstongran Sun 06-Jun-21 11:04:52

If any former PM with very strong views on independence - pro or anti - is meeting with the future monarch in private, he is clearly doing so with a view to furthering his political views

Bit like when Blair hopped over to chat with the EU pre-referendum Alegrias. It didn’t further the Remain cause either so perhaps the same will happen regards Indy2!

Baggs Sun 06-Jun-21 10:11:42

If I've understood correctly, I think a politically independent Scotland that the SNP envisages would still have the Queen as their state figurehead.

¿I suppose the roping in of the Cambridges is to try and save the political union though?

Alegrias1 Sun 06-Jun-21 10:10:07

Yes, I know Blossoming, but some posters think that its obvious that the RF would be trying to save the Union, because they (the posters) think that dissolving the Union of the Parliament means Scotland would get rid of the RF at the same time. So I was just heading off any "well what do you expect" comments.

Unfortunately its not as obvious to some as you and I think it is.

Blossoming Sun 06-Jun-21 10:04:56

Reminder: The Union of the Crowns is not the same as the Union of Parliaments

Stating the obvious there.

The Acts of Union were passed by the English parliament in 1706 and the Scottish parliament in 1707.

Alegrias1 Sun 06-Jun-21 09:31:08

For a family that don't get involved with politics they sure do get involved in a lot of politics.

Reminder: The Union of the Crowns is not the same as the Union of Parliaments.

www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/scotland-william-and-kate-edinburgh-cambridge-duchess-b938968.html?itm_source=Internal&itm_channel=section_banner&itm_campaign=breaking-news-ticker&itm_content=2

Casdon Sun 30-May-21 19:57:14

Brother Chip to Cameron I’d say. Brown and Major escaped with more intact reputations.

Alegrias1 Sun 30-May-21 19:37:45

I did choose DC because his recent difficulties make him an easy target wink

Tony Blair maybe? Now that would be weird.....

Casdon Sun 30-May-21 19:31:03

Yes that would have seemed odd I agree Alegrias1, particularly at the moment after his recent difficulties. I’m not sure it would seem as odd if they’d met John Major though, albeit probably not in Scotland.

Alegrias1 Sun 30-May-21 19:14:29

I'm sure they have that opportunity Casdon.

This occurred to me over dinner; if David Cameron had rolled up to a private meeting with PW, and it hadn't been announced in advance, and Channel4 weren't allowed to film the car arriving, wouldn't that seem just a tiny bit odd?

Casdon Sun 30-May-21 19:05:45

I’m not sure that in reality a former prime minister ever reverts to being a private citizen, they all seem to be regularly approached for their views about a huge range of areas of political issues, and sit on numerous influential bodies?

Elegran Sun 30-May-21 18:56:51

Perhaps it is just those who talk a lot.

Alegrias1 Sun 30-May-21 18:12:53

Well all private citizens can have "policies". But we don't all get to talk about them in private with the future king in his Granny's Palace.